scholarly journals Detection of Fight or Flight Reaction on Facial Skin Thermogram using Spatio-Temporal Spectrum Differential Analysis

2006 ◽  
Vol 126 (6) ◽  
pp. 470-477 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akio Nozawa ◽  
Satoshi Tomono ◽  
Tota Mizuno ◽  
Hideto Ide
2010 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-49
Author(s):  
Hirotoshi Asano ◽  
◽  
Hideto Ide

Before a person has a car accident, he may have several “close calls.” These “close calls” may cause a person to experience tension and fear. People experience the “fight or flight reaction” (FFR) under such circumstances, as it is known that people exhibit the FFR when they feel anxiety, strain, or threat. If the manifestation of the FFR in a driver can be determined using a biological measurement, it would be an extremely effective indicator that might help in the prevention of car accidents. In this research, we conducted FFR-arousing experiments using a driving simulator, and the STSDA method was used to detect spatio-temporal changes in the skin temperature on facial skin thermograms accompanying the occurrence of the FFR.


2001 ◽  
Vol 280 (4) ◽  
pp. F551-F561 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael S. Goligorsky

As animals respond to environmental stress with a set of default reactions described as the “fight-or-flight” response, so do epithelial and endothelial cells when they are confronting stressors in their microenvironment. This review will summarize a growing body of data suggesting the existence of a set of stereotypical cellular reactions to stress, provide some examples of diseases that are characterized by excessive flight reactions, describe the cellular mechanisms whereby the fight-or-flight reaction is accomplished, as well as cellular mechanisms triggering either fight or flight. It is proposed that cell-matrix adhesion is a sensitive indicator of the severity of stress. This indicator is interfaced with several default programs for cellular survival or death, thus dictating the fate of the cell. Some diagnostic and therapeutic applications of the concept, presently used and potentially useful, are outlined. The essential feature of this concept is its ability to categorize cellular events in terms of either type of default reaction, predict the details of each, and potentially exploit them clinically.


2005 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
pp. 15-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen C. Ardley ◽  
Philip A. Robinson

The selectivity of the ubiquitin–26 S proteasome system (UPS) for a particular substrate protein relies on the interaction between a ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme (E2, of which a cell contains relatively few) and a ubiquitin–protein ligase (E3, of which there are possibly hundreds). Post-translational modifications of the protein substrate, such as phosphorylation or hydroxylation, are often required prior to its selection. In this way, the precise spatio-temporal targeting and degradation of a given substrate can be achieved. The E3s are a large, diverse group of proteins, characterized by one of several defining motifs. These include a HECT (homologous to E6-associated protein C-terminus), RING (really interesting new gene) or U-box (a modified RING motif without the full complement of Zn2+-binding ligands) domain. Whereas HECT E3s have a direct role in catalysis during ubiquitination, RING and U-box E3s facilitate protein ubiquitination. These latter two E3 types act as adaptor-like molecules. They bring an E2 and a substrate into sufficiently close proximity to promote the substrate's ubiquitination. Although many RING-type E3s, such as MDM2 (murine double minute clone 2 oncoprotein) and c-Cbl, can apparently act alone, others are found as components of much larger multi-protein complexes, such as the anaphase-promoting complex. Taken together, these multifaceted properties and interactions enable E3s to provide a powerful, and specific, mechanism for protein clearance within all cells of eukaryotic organisms. The importance of E3s is highlighted by the number of normal cellular processes they regulate, and the number of diseases associated with their loss of function or inappropriate targeting.


2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (6) ◽  
pp. 1733-1747 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina Klausen ◽  
Fabian Kaiser ◽  
Birthe Stüven ◽  
Jan N. Hansen ◽  
Dagmar Wachten

The second messenger 3′,5′-cyclic nucleoside adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) plays a key role in signal transduction across prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Cyclic AMP signaling is compartmentalized into microdomains to fulfil specific functions. To define the function of cAMP within these microdomains, signaling needs to be analyzed with spatio-temporal precision. To this end, optogenetic approaches and genetically encoded fluorescent biosensors are particularly well suited. Synthesis and hydrolysis of cAMP can be directly manipulated by photoactivated adenylyl cyclases (PACs) and light-regulated phosphodiesterases (PDEs), respectively. In addition, many biosensors have been designed to spatially and temporarily resolve cAMP dynamics in the cell. This review provides an overview about optogenetic tools and biosensors to shed light on the subcellular organization of cAMP signaling.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document